Pollution: A Federal or State Problem? Industry spokesmen say water pollution is a local problem; conservationists, consumer groups disagree No firm recommendations for solving the nation's water pollution problems emerged from the first National Conference on Water Pollution. But the three-day session, held in Washington, D.C., gave the more than 1000 delegates plenty of opportunity to air their views on pollution problems. Purpose of the conference, scheduled by President Eisenhower last February when he vetoed a bill to boost federal grants for waste disposal plants, was to "study and assess the problem of water pollu-
Secretary Flemming Keep pollution control in PHS
tion and to develop goals and programs that will assure progress in this field." Most controversial subject discussed at the conference was the question of responsibility for abating pollution. Conservationists and representatives of consumer groups thought that primary responsibility for pollution control should rest with the Federal Government and urged the Government to take a firmer hand in abating water pollution. But industry spokesmen took the opposite view. In their opinion, pollution is a local problem and primary responsibility for control should be vested in state and local authorities. As a result of a series of panel discussions, 31 recommendations were put before the conference. Among the recommendations: • Expand construction of municipal and industrial waste disposal plants to keep pace with population and indus24
C&EN
DEC.
26,
1960
trial growth; eliminate the backlog of treatment plants by 1970. • Establish as a national policy comprehensive development of each major river basin to integrate water quality control with all water resource development. • Require federal installations to treat their wastes in accordance with the standards used for cities and industries in the area. • Enlarge and extend programs for monitoring water quality.
Surgeon General Burney Pollution price tag: $10.6 billion
Although the panel recommendations were discussed, the conference took no formal action on them. Local Control Needed. State and regional control authorities are best suited to cope with water problems, Albert E. Forster, president and board chairman of Hercules Powder, told the conference. He reasons that water problems differ radically from one area of the country to another. Mr. Forster points out that industry has worked successfully with regional authorities to control pollution in the Delaware River Valley, the Kanawha Valley, and along the Ohio. "In the last few decades," Mr. Forster says, "U.S. industry, for the most part, has not only assumed its responsibility in the conservation and safekeeping of water supplies, but has done so at a faster rate than many municipalities. The chemical industry has been outstanding in its program of water pollution control, having spent more than $100 million in
the past year alone on the problem." Water quality control should be exercised at the local or regional level to maintain the flexibility needed to meet individual problems, Leonard Pasek of Kimberly-Clark told the conference. Industry has recognized its responsibility in pollution control and has no intention of shirking this responsibility, he says. And in many cases, industry must increase its efforts to decrease pollution. Industry is perfectly willing to spend money to improve situations in particular areas where the need has been demonstrated, Mr. Pasek says. But industry objects to being forced to spend large sums to meet arbitrary standards unrelated to the conditions in a particular stretch of stream. And, he adds, excessive waste treatment requirements may prevent industrial growth. What's Ahead. It will cost $10.6 billion to clean up the nation's water supplies during the next 10 years, Surgeon General Leroy E. Burney said. About half this sum would be needed to build municipal sewage treatment plants, but the amount required would be much more than that available under the present federal grant program. However, Congress seems likely to provide some of the money needed. Rep. John A. Blatnik (D.-Minn.) told the conference he plans to introduce a bill in Congress next month which would more than double the present $50 million annual authorization to help cities build treatment plants. In addition, Rep. Blatnik's proposed bill would -take responsibility for water pollution control away from the Public Health Service, set up a separate unit in the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare for the problem. The federal grant program has been very successful in combating water pollution, Arthur S. Flemming, Secretary of HEW, told the conference. He favors an increase in federal participation in the program. However, Secretary Flemming thinks Rep. Blatnik's proposal to take jurisdiction over water pollution away from the Public Health Service would be a mistake. Over the years, he says, PHS has built up a staff of competent and dedicated public servants who recognize that crusading for clean streams is one of their major responsibilities. To take pollution control responsibilities away from this group, he says, "would retard rather than speed progress."
